The issue is “whether the appellant failed to take such care in all the circumstances as was reasonable to see that a person would be reasonably safe in using the premises.” As determined in Waldick v. Malcolm, 1991 CanLII 71 (SCC), [1991] 2 S.C.R. 456 at page 472: … the statutory duty on occupiers is framed quite generally… That duty is to take reasonable care in the circumstances to make premises safe. That duty does not change but the factors which are relevant to an assessment of what constitutes reasonable care will necessarily be very specific to each fact situation – thus the proviso “such care as in all the circumstances of the case is reasonable.”
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.